Shapiro:
- Says no flexibility in bullpen, not many guys with options.
- Stanford will now be the long man, and Perez will be given more opportunities later in games.
- Politte has shoulder fatigue, and has been shutdown for a week. Could be an option after the all-star break or early August.

Wedge:
- Feel Dellucci's injury is fairly serious, but won't know for sure until MRI results come back.
- Won't predetermine how playing time will be distributed in LF and RF, but will play it out and look to put the best lineup out there.
- No specific plan other than to use everyone regularly.
- Initially, Michaels and Gutierrez will probably get more work, but with us going to Washington this weekend they all will likely be used anyway.
- Knows Francisco has done a good job against right-handers.

I understand Byrd has had his problems the last month, but I think it could be a potential disaster in the clubhouse if they yank him from the rotation and put him in long relief. Stanford has looked good, but man, it is just two starts. I'm not ready to shakeup the chemistry of the team more than it already has been today.

Now, come talk to me in a month if Byrd continues to struggle.

(Oh, and I just don't see the Indians willing to have their long relief man making $7M. )

Am kinda surprised there is such a tough opposition to Wedge and Shapiro.

With the 1yr contracts, it seemed obvious to me that they didn't expect the vets to come in and be "the answer." Rather, they were placeholders in specific roles, to be replaced for ineffectiveness or injury by cherry-picked kids who appear ready for a callup at particular points in the season.

Dolan may eat some contracts, if guys like Hernandez cannot be dealt.
To me, they're acting like a playoff contender instead of completely relying on the small-market, we-live-and-die-with-the-kids approach.

Now, losing the high draft pick- I see your point. And I don't have a problem with the opposition to the number of older position players. But the OFs shouldn't be lumped with the relief pitchers, imo- the Tribe seems to be putting the young relievers in positions where they are most likely to succeed, rather than throwing them all out there to sink or swim together on a playoff contender.

[quote="Consigliere"]Art, for the most part I agree with you. I'm just saying they need to give Byrd until the All-Star break. What, is that about 4-5 more starts?

If the struggles continue, you trade him or move him to the long man role as you suggested, and move a Stanford into his spot in the rotation./quote]

I don't have a problem with leaving Byrd in the rotation until the all-star break. The problem that I see is that Wedgiro is notorious for being extremely slow at pulling the plug on what isn't working. Especially when the guy that isn't getting the job done is 1 of the higher paid members of the team.

It wouldn't surprise me to see Byrd continue to start games into late August before they move him out of the rotation, even if he continues to struggle....which I think he will.

If the players receiving the one year guaranteed contracts were allowed to be beaten out by current players I wouldn't have a problem with this process either. It just seems as though they have the preferential treatment in being provided the playing time.

If the players receiving the one year guaranteed contracts were allowed to be beaten out by current players I wouldn't have a problem with this process either. It just seems as though they have the preferential treatment in being provided the playing time.

After reading what Shapiro and Wedge said about the moves I keep having flashbacks to last year when Jason Johnson was finally sent packing after being given (not winning) the 5th spot in the rotation over Sowers and Carmona. Seems like deja vu all over again with Hernandez being kept out of spring training over guys like Perez and Mujica.

Byrd has had six bad starts in a row. Lefties are hitting .351 against him. This is not a temporary situation. Last year they hit .369 against him for the ENTIRE SEASON. I'm saying that NO starting pitcher can be successful when getting killed that badly on either side of the plate.

Is there any reason to think that at his age he can suddenly reverse a one-and-a-half year trend? He spent the whole offseason working on this problem with zero success. What's the point in continuing down this road?

I think the Jason Johnson comparison is valid. Sowers was lighting it up in Buffalo and they just kept trotting Johnson out there to get hammered. Shapiro was very slow in making that move, which is understandable on some level because they don't want to rush young players to the bigs prematurely like they did with Brandon Phillips. It was that kind of thinking that got Grady sent down at the end of spring training three years ago.

But Stanford is not a young player being nursed carefully along. He's what, 28 years old? He lost a couple of years to the Tommy John surgery, so his time is now.

Finally, it's starting to look like the Tigers aren't going away and this thing might come down to the final week. We missed the playoffs by one game a few years ago, and we could be in that situation again. Every game counts. Sticking with Byrd for four more starts instead of going with Stanford could cost us two wins, and that might be the difference this year.

IIRC, Jake Westbrook was originally tried as a starter with mixed results, so they put him in long relief. He got his game together and pitched a seven inning no-hitter in relief, and that's when they knew he was ready to go back to the rotation. Let Byrd work on his pitches in the bullpen, and if he throws well in long relief and Stanford gets lit up, we can always switch them back.

If Byrd gets lit up again against a crappy team tomorrow night, I wouldn't give him three more starts, not when one win could be the difference between going home and going to the playoffs.

Not to beat this to death, but take a gander at Byrd's stats for the last three years.

Versus right-handed hitters:

2004 .219
2005 .234
2006 .256
2007 .303

Spot a trend? He's gone from being very good, to mediocre, to very bad.

Versus left-handed hitters:

2004 .329
2005 .306
2006 .369
2007 .351

No trend there. Just pure consistency. I ask again, is there any logical, pursuasive reason to believe this guy will ever be an effective starting pitcher again? Back in '04 and '05 when he was very tough on right-handers, he was OK as a third or fourth starter. The 12-11 with a 3.74 ERA in 2005 got him the big contract from the Indians. But that was the last year he was tough on right-handers and now he's really slipping badly, as well as being almost helpless against lefties.

Somebody convince me he can turn this thing around in the next four starts. If he gets hit hard tomorrow that's seven bad outings in a row. What more do they need to see?

googleeph2 wrote:Am kinda surprised there is such a tough opposition to Wedge and Shapiro.

With the 1yr contracts, it seemed obvious to me that they didn't expect the vets to come in and be "the answer." Rather, they were placeholders in specific roles, to be replaced for ineffectiveness or injury by cherry-picked kids who appear ready for a callup at particular points in the season.

Dolan may eat some contracts, if guys like Hernandez cannot be dealt.To me, they're acting like a playoff contender instead of completely relying on the small-market, we-live-and-die-with-the-kids approach.

Now, losing the high draft pick- I see your point. And I don't have a problem with the opposition to the number of older position players. But the OFs shouldn't be lumped with the relief pitchers, imo- the Tribe seems to be putting the young relievers in positions where they are most likely to succeed, rather than throwing them all out there to sink or swim together on a playoff contender.